Employment cancellation without notice violates natural justice principles; adherence to reservation guidelines is mandatory.

JUDGMENT :

Anjani Kumar Sharan, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The present writ petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:

(i) To quash the order contained in memo no- 1450 dated 15.11.2006 issued by the District Magistrate Sitamarhi (Respondent No-5) whereby and where under appointment/employment of petitioners, who were appointed as Siksha Mitra and subsequently observed as Panchayat Teacher, has been set aside.

(ii) To quash the order dated 05.05.2012, passed by the District Teacher Employment Appellate Authority, Sitamarhi (Respondent No-4) in Appeal No- 129/2011 whereby and where under the appeal preferred by the petitioner along with others, filed in view of order dated 11.07.2011 passed in C.W.J.C. No- 4422/2007 by this Hon'ble Court has been dismissed.

(iii) To quash the order dated 10.06.2019 passed in Appeal No- 170/2018 by the State Appellate Authority, Patna (Respondent No-3) whereby and where under the appeal preferred by the petitioners against order dated 15.11.2006 (Annexure-1) and order dated 05.05.2012 (Annexure-2) has also been dismissed.

(iv) To direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioners on the post of Panchayat Teacher with all consequential and monitory benefits.

And for any such order(s) as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the present facts and circumstances of this case.”

3. The short facts of the present case is that the petitioners were employed as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra (hereinafter referred as ‘PSM’) in the year 2003 on the recommendation of Sukh Suvidha Samiti of Panchharwa Gram Panchayat under Mejarganj Block in Sitamarhi District. The private respondent no.12, Umesh Kumar Pandey, filed a writ petition bearing C.W.J.C. No.13698 of 2004 before this Court challenging the employment of PSMs in Panchharwa Gram Panchayat and praying for his own employment as PSM. The above-said writ application was disposed off by order passed on 22.03.2006 directing the respondent no.12 to represent his case before the Collector of the district, which would be considered and disposed off in accordance with law, by a speaking order, within a period of six weeks from the date of its filing. In pursuance of the order of this Court, respondent no.12 filed a representation before Collector, Sitamarhi on which, Collector, Sitamarhi passed an order vide memo no.14 dated 15.11.2006, cancelling the employment of all PSMs except one Pramod Kumar who was employed in SC category. Aggrieved by the order of Collector, Sitamarhi, the petitioners filed a writ petition bearing CWJC No.4422 of 2007 before this Court, which was heard along with analogous writ applications and disposed off by a common order passed on 11.07.2011, giving liberty to the petitioners to approach the District Authority, in pursuance of which the petitioners filed Case No.129 of the 2011 before the District Authority which was disposed off by an order passed on 05.05.2012 and the appeal of the petitioners was dismissed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the Collector, Sitamarhi cancelled the employment of the petitioners without giving any notice to them, which was in violation of the principle of natural justice. Learned District Authority has not considered their plea in this regard. Learned District Authority has also not enquired whether the reservation roster was followed or not in employing the petitioners.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the petitioners have challenged the impugned order on the ground that they were not impleaded as parties in C.W.J.C. No. 13698 of 2004 before this Court or before Collector, Sitamarhi and their employment was cancelled without hearing them and without issuing any show cause notice to them. He further submits the private respondents have never appeared in the counselling, the petitioners were employed in compliance of the reservation roster and the private resp